中学生学习心理调控能力培养的研究

一、学生学习心理调控能力现状的调查及分析 1.学校心理研究室对学生分层次进行了量表测试,我们采用了瑞文量表及韦克斯勒集体量表,对96届学习困难的学生进行了心理辅导和智力测试,并对95届学习成绩优秀的学生也进行了智力测试。 统计结果表明,95届成绩优秀的学生IQ平均在118,而96届学习困难的学习IQ平均在112,两     

您想为孩子做IQ测试吗

IQ,即“智力商数”。IQ高,说明智商高,智力好,聪明;IQ低,说明智商低,智力差,愚笨。自从1905年,法国心理学家比纳创造性地设计了第一个IQ测试后,智力就成了如同体重一样可以测量的东西。如今,IQ测试已经相当盛行了,很多孩子在幼儿时期就已经有过lQ测试的经历。因为父母认为IQ测试有助于早点儿了解孩子的能力、特长,以便因材施教。您对IQ测试怎么看呢?您想为孩子做lQ测试吗?     

塑造大学生智商情商和谐共融的健全人格探析

一、大学生智商、情商的人格理论建构的基本内涵大学生智商与情商理论与智力因素与非智力因素的研究同属于一个教育研究课题。智商(intelligence quo-tient简写成IQ)是用以表示智力水平的工具,也是测量智力水平常用的方法,智商的高低反映着智力水平的高低。智商主要反映人的认知能力、思维能力、语言能力、观察能力、计算能力等。智商的作用主要在于更好的认识事物。智商高的人,思维品质优良,学习能力强,认识深度深,容易在某个专业领域作出杰出成就,成为某个领域的专家。所谓情商(emotional quotient简写成EQ),狭义地说,它包括情绪的自我…     

论大学生情感智力培养与思想品德教育

情感智力(EQ)的提出,对于传统教育中只重视智商(IQ)培养的规范,产生了动摇性的冲击.而道德在情感智力培养中是个关键的因素.这就使得我们在培养大学生情感智力的同时,不能忽视思想品德教育在其中的重要作用.     

智力超常儿童韦氏儿童智力量表第四版分数模式及其认知特性的初步研究

本文针对智力超常即天才儿童在韦氏儿童智力量表第四版(SISC)-中文版中的测验结果,分析智力超常儿童在总智商和四个指数上的表现.研究结果显示,智力超常儿童最突出的优势能力是对视觉信息进行抽象思考和加工处理的能力(即流体智力).单纯智商成绩IQ高于130的儿童不一定就是智力超常儿童.家长的教育程度是反映遗传和教育环境对儿童智力发展影响的重要变量,WISC-中文版可以为智力超常儿童的评估提供丰富的信息.     

走出智商“误区”

课余时,同学们会谈论这样的话题:某某同学聪明,智商高,边玩边学,成绩也挺好;某某同学真“弱智”,连那么简单的题都做不出来,一到期末就扯全班的平均分。那么,智商的作用真的那样神奇吗?是不是有了“超智商”,成了“神童”,就能解决学习中的所有问题呢?答案显然是否定的。在心理学上,智商IQ(intelligence quotient)是指智力商数,它最初是用个体的心理年龄除以实际年龄,再乘100所得的数值。一般而言,大多数人的智力水平都属于中等程度(100分左右)。智商特别高的(140分以上)和特别低的(70分以下)只占人群的极少部分,两者相加也不足千分之三。…     

新加坡教育的感悟

一、大学生智商、情商的人格理论建构的基本内涵 大学生智商与情商理论与智力因素与非智力因素的研究同属于一个教育研究课题。智商（intelligence quotient简写成IQ）是用以表示智力水平的工具。也是测最智力水平常用的方法，智商的高低反映着智力水平的高低。智商主要反映人的认知能力、思维能力、语言能力、观察能力、计算能力等。智商的作用主要在于更好的认识事物。智商高的人，思维品质优良，学习能力强，认识深度深，容易在某个专业领域作出杰出成就，成为某个领域的专家。     

欢迎加入“挑战IQ俱乐部”

俱乐部简介:有人说“聪明的大脑是‘玩’出来的!”这句话的确有一定的道理。智力是一个人学习、记忆、思维、认识客观事物并运用知识解决实际问题的潜在能力,人们习惯用智商(IQ)来表示一个人的智力状     

学习障碍鉴别方法综述

通过对学习障碍鉴别方法发展历程的回顾,重点对智力一成就差异模式、干预一反应模式、动态评估模式、全面的认知评估模式进行阐释和评述,分析了目前学习障碍鉴别中出现的弗林效应、地板效应等问题,探讨了这些方法对今后学习障碍鉴别的启示．     

多元智力理论对儿童英语教学的启示

一、多元智力理论传统的智高(IQ)理论和皮亚杰的认知发展理论都认为,智力是以语言能力和数理—逻辑能力为核心的、以整合方式存在的一种能力。近年来,西方不少心理学家对传统的智力概念的内涵开始提出     

从差异取向的评估到认知—干预取向的评估--学习障碍评估模式的新趋势

长期以来智力分数与成绩分数的差异被认为是诊断学习障碍的主要标准 ,近年来随着认知心理学对于阅读障碍的语音意识机制的研究取得的突破 ,研究者对用差异标准来诊断学习障碍进行了批评 ,并主张用与学习的认知过程有关的测评来取代不准确的智商和成绩的差异这一标准。本文分析了这一新的评估取向 ,并通过对比Kavale与Fletcher的评估模式 ,具体指明了今后学习障碍的评估与诊断所应有的前进方向     

Tourette syndrome and learning disabilities.

We reviewed the records of 42 consecutive cases of children with Tourette Syndrome (TS) who had IQs above 70, and contrasted the reading, reading comprehension, math, and spelling quotients with IQ scores to determine how many would meet criteria for a learning disability. The mean IQ of the 35 males and 7 females was 94.4 and was higher than the mean math score (82.8), spelling score (90.4), reading score (87.4), and reading comprehension score (85.3). Using a 1.5 standard deviation discrepancy, 51% met criteria for learning disability in at least one academic area; 21% had a 2-standard-deviation discrepancy. Children with TS frequently have learning disabilities, and assessment of academic achievement should be a routine aspect in the evaluation of such children.     

A Critical Analysis of Siegel's Case for Revision of the Learning Disability Construct

In this paper I analyse Siegel's revisionist conceptualization of the learning disability concept. Siegel has attempted to demonstrate that the construct of learning disabilities is flawed because of its long‐term linkage with the variable of intelligence. The discrepancy formulation is the particular focus of her criticism. She has denigrated the use of IQ tests in LD diagnosis and argued that intelligence and reading measure many of the same abilities and therefore any difference between these two functions is confounded; that IQ is not a valid measure of reading potential in children with LD and normal populations; and that logical analysis and empirical research demonstrate that the concept of intelligence is redundant in any conception of learning disabilities. I present arguments against each of these propositions and several other matters raised in her paper. I propose two basic approaches to learning disabilities and give expression to these in two theoretical models, a simple categorical model (designated as Model C) and the underachievement model (Model D). I show that Siegel's interpretation is based on a weak version of Model C, but that this model fails to elucidate the essential meaning of the learning disability construct. I show that Model D is the more appropriate alternative. I contend that the application of standard regression procedures inherent in Model D would lead to a more appropriate definition of LD and that more stringent standards for the underachievement criterion would offset many of the problems that Siegel has highlighted in her paper.     

Misconceptions in Van den Broeck's representation of misconceptions about learning disability research

The methods and conclusions of Van den Broeck (in this issue) are evaluated from two perspectives: (a) statistical considerations and (b) theoretical models of IQ and achievement, specifically reading achievement. We consider the statistical model proposed by Van den Broeck for the regression-based discrepancy model (RDM) to be either irrelevant or conceptually inconsistent with current models of IQ and achievement. The resulting simulation produced exemplar cases that are not realistic in terms of practice. The theoretical representations of IQ and achievement were, in our understanding, inconsistent with contemporary models of either. We suggest that acceptable models support the use of the RDM as it has been proposed by us and by others as one component of the determination of the presence or absence of a learning disability.     

Factors influencing the identification of black and white students with learning disabilities

This study examined the differential influence of an IQ cutoff and standard score or regression-based method for determining a severe discrepancy as eligibility criteria for the identification of black and white students with learning disabilities. Subjects were 218 white and 132 black students referred for possible learning disability services. The results of the study demonstrated that the use of a standard score method for determining a severe discrepancy and the use of an IQ cutoff above the range for mental retardation resulted in the disproportionate underrepresentation of black students meeting eligibility criteria. In contrast, when a regression-based method to determine a severe discrepancy was used, along with the absence of an IQ cutoff, no differences were discerned between the two groups. The implications of these findings for current practice are discussed.     

Predictor variables related to the classification of learning disabilities

Psychoeducational assessment variables for high school students were subjected to a discriminant function analysis. Variables predictive of learning disability classification were spelling, IQ, and a student interview question.     

Differential genetic etiology of reading disability as a function of IQ

To test the hypothesis that the genetic etiology of reading disability differs as a function of IQ, composite reading performance data from 223 pairs of identical twins and 169 pairs of same-gender fraternal twins in which at least one member of each pair was classified with reading disability were subjected to multiple regression analysis (DeFries & Fulker, 1985, 1988). In the total sample, heritability of the group deficit in reading performance (h(g)2) was .58 (+/- .08). However, when the basic regression model was fitted separately to data from twin pairs with average Wechsler (1974, 1981) full scale IQ scores below 100 or 100 and above, resulting estimates of h(g)2 were .43 and .72, respectively, a significant difference (p < or = .03, one-tailed). The results of fitting extended regression models to reading performance and continuous IQ data provide evidence that the genetic etiology of reading disability differs as a linear function of IQ (p < or = .007, one-tailed). These results suggest that IQ is relevant for the diagnosis of reading disability and that environmental influences may be more salient as a cause of reading difficulties in children with lower IQ scores.     

The role of IQ in a component model of reading

The purpose of this study was to test the role of visual processing speed and IQ in a model of reading. This study investigated whether the processes involved in reading differ between a group of children with and a group without reading disability. These two groups of children completed tests of reading comprehension, listening comprehension, decoding, processing speed, and intelligence. The results indicated that processing speed explains a significant amount of variance in reading comprehension over that accounted for by the simple view of reading. Also, IQ accounts for a significant amount of variance in reading over that accounted for by the simple view of reading and processing speed. Path analyses indicated that the effect of IQ on reading is partially mediated by decoding in the children with reading disability. The results point to the importance of the role of IQ in predicting reading comprehension.     

Matthew effects in children with learning disabilities: Development of reading,IQ, and psychosocial problems from grade 2 to grade 8

Reading achievement, IQ, and behavior problems were assessed in second and eighth grade for a longitudinal sample of 57 children. Changes in these scores over time were compared for children with no learning disabilities versus children with math or reading disabilities (research-identified and/or school-identified). A widening of the group difference in IQ was seen between the math disabled and nondisabled groups, but otherwise the gaps between groups remained unchanged or narrowed over the six-year interval, indicating that hypothesized negative consequences of initial academic difficulties (“Matthew effects”) did not occur for most of the children with learning disabilities. Elevated rates of behavior problems were seen only for the group with math disabilities, suggesting that the type of learning disability needs to be taken into account in research on the association between academic and psychosocial problems.